Dan Walters: Moderate militants make their move

"Militant middle-of-the-roader" has an incongruous, oxymoron-like ring. Almost by definition, those who are neither true-believing liberals nor conservatives don't get excited as ideological fires consume others.

Yet, polls indicate that self- described moderates comprise about half of the California electorate. Both major parties, dominated by adherents of rigid ideological doctrine, continue to lose ground, while "declined to state" is the fastest-growing voter segment.

The unifying features of political moderates are their frustration with the political status quo, which freezes them out of meaningful voices in government, and their desire for movement on long-stalled policy issues such as transportation and education. They sense that California has become, functionally if not structurally, ungovernable and yearn for reform.

That's where militant moderation is beginning to evolve. An informal cadre of influential business and civic figures, operating either individually or through foundations with names such as Irvine, Hewlett and Packard, is laying the groundwork for what it hopes will be a renaissance of political life – a renewal of the days 40 or 50 years ago when governments were responsive and responsible.

One manifestation of the syndrome is the involvement of a small group of wealthy moderates – Southern California developer Eli Broad most prominently – in several Democratic legislative primary contests. Their common denominator is their connection to EdVoice, an advocacy group that has battled with the education establishment over such issues as charter schools, and one of their candidates is Christopher Cabaldon, mayor of West Sacramento and former president of EdVoice.

The "Voices of Reform" project of San Francisco's Commonwealth Club, which advocates "structural governance reform," is another manifestation of militant moderation, focused on such issues as legislative redistricting and the state budget.

The most ambitious effort, however, is a new organization called California Forward, headed by Democrat Leon Panetta, a former congressman and White House chief of staff, and Republican Thomas McKernan, the top executive of the Automobile Club of Southern California, with a bipartisan board that's a virtual who's who of political moderates and a broad array of prestigious foundation backers who've committed $16 million.

California Forward's staffers have been touring the state for months, talking with opinion-makers and civic figures about what would be needed to make government more effective. It will formally launch its drive this week with a high-profile event in Sacramento to frame its issues.

It's a laudable, long-overdue effort by those who have a stake in the state and have been frustrated by its endemic political gridlock.

Whether renewal is possible, however, is uncertain, since much of California's ungovernability stems from the factors that generate so many of its knotty issues – population growth, economic evolution and cultural diversity.

Any major issue spawns dozens, or even hundreds, of stakeholder groups with specific interests, and achieving a workable consensus borders on the impossible, as the demise of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's health care scheme attests. We Californians may be discovering, the hard way, a fatal flaw in the American system of government, in which the diffusion of authority through "checks and balances" makes rational action nearly impossible.

Like Schwarzenegger's largely failed governorship, California Forward's crusade is another test of whether the state's governance is fixable without a massive structural overhaul that would look beyond the American system into another form of representative democracy.

About the writer:

• Call The Bee's Dan Walters, (916) 321-1195. Back columns, www.sacbee.com/walters.